With pharmaceutical industry money contaminating West
Virginia politics like a bad chemical in the water, legislation that
would require a prescription for meth-fueling pseudoephedrine is on the
ropes in the state legislature.
The Consumer Healthcare Products Association — the pharmaceutical industry — is spending big money to defeat the legislation.
The industry just spent $10,000 to $15,000
on a study that claimed that passing the bill into law would cost the
state $149.9 million over the next ten years. The study’s author, West
Liberty University Associate Professor Serkan Catma, appeared on
Talkline with Hoppy Kercheval earlier this week and admitted that he
only looked at one side of the equation and deliberately did not look at
how the law would benefit West Virginia in lives, injuries and
emergency and law enforcement resources saved.
The pharmaceutical industry is also flooding the airwaves,
including Kercheval’s radio show, with ads featuring a homemaker named
“Emily” claiming that “some state lawmakers in Charleston want to limit
our access to the cold and allergy medicines we rely on because some
criminals use it to make meth.”
“They are trying to pass a law that forces us to see a
doctor and to get a prescription for the same kind of medicine that my
family has used for years — medicines like Zyrtec D and Claritin D,”
Emily says. “If the law passes, it will cost us more because of doctor
office visits. And it will take more of our precious time. They should
punish the criminals, not families like ours. I’m calling our elected
officials to tell them that they should not make life harder for
families like ours. I found out how at stopmethnotmeds.com.”
(MetroNews is owned by Kercheval buddy Republican John Raese.
Kerchavel and his wife contributed $4,800 to Raese’s 2010 Senate
campaign. But even given Kercheval’s political bias, he came out last
week in favor of the legislation, saying “I would vote for it because
the police support it.” )
Of course, what the pharmaceutical industry homemaker
“Emily” doesn’t say in the radio ad — and what the Big Pharma robocalls
that are flooding the state don’t say — is what everybody knows — the
legislation exempts tamper resistant pseudoephedrine products — products
that can’t be easily made into methamphetamine. You will be able to buy
those tamper resistant drugs without a prescription.
But as usual, it’s not about the truth, it’s about the
money. The pharmaceutical industry stands to lose billions if the law
sweeps the country. Oregon and Mississippi have already passed it. And
if West Virginia, the state routinely ranked last in “well being” surveys,
passes a law that says no to the pharmaceutical industry while at the
same time protecting it’s own people from shake and bake meth fires and
injuries, we might start moving up in the rankings.
In 2011, the House of Delegates passed the prescription
bill overwhelmingly by a vote of 77 to 23. But the bill died in the
Senate on a tie 16-16 vote.
This year, things are reversed. The Senate last week passed
the bill by a vote of 25 to 9 vote. But the bill is on the ropes in the
House and the Democratic House leadership is nervous about bringing the
bill to the House floor before the end of the session.
The bill will be voted upon by the House Judiciary Committee probably within the next couple of weeks.
The difference between 2011 and 2014? This year is an
election year. And fence sitters in the House are looking at Big
Pharma’s money and right wing corporatist challengers and saying — can I
really afford to do the right thing?
House of Delegate Democrats Jason Barrett (D-Berkeley) and
Tiffany Lawrence (D-Jefferson) are leaning no. Both won their 2012
elections by thin margins.
Barrett did not return calls seeking comment.
When asked how she will vote on the legislation, Lawerence
wrote — “I don’t believe at this time that we should require a
prescription for pseudoephedrine products.”
She then sent pharmaceutical industry talking points.
Lawrence has taken pharmaceutical industry contributions in
her 2012 election campaign, including from Merck (makers of
pseudoephedrine product Claritin D) and a pharmacists PAC.
When asked about these contributions, Lawrence wrote that
“no decision that I ever make on legislation is any result of any
contribution my campaign PAC receives.”
“I do research and weigh feedback and facts from my constituents and state and national sources,” she said.
“I’ve been endorsed by PACs that represent healthcare and
hospitals in the past as well, but am somewhat offended by the idea that
any decision I support or not support be linked to funding. That simply
isn’t good public policy and I don’t legislate based on contributions.
My vote on any issue has never and will never be for sale.”
“I take my job very seriously while balancing the ideas of
all of my constituents before making educated decisions,” Lawrence said.
She then returns to her pharmaceutical industry talking points.
“We should crack down on criminals and not law-abiding
consumers when it comes to this issue as presented currently,” she
writes.
How are we cracking down on consumers exactly? Consumers can still get the tamper resistant product without a prescription.
In response to this, Lawrence sends follow up pharmaceutical industry talking points.
“Significant amounts of meth could be made with this tamper
‘proof ‘ drug with common cook methods,” Lawrence said. “This is why
I’m not certain we are fixing the actual problem with the current form
of the bill.”
One problem with that pharmaceutical industry talking point?
Like most of them — it’s not true. First of all, no one
claimed they are tamper “proof.” They are tamper resistant. That means
that if a meth maker wants to make meth out of them, they can, but only
10 percent to 25 percent of what you could make from non tamper
resistant pseudoephedrine. And it’s not worth it to a meth maker to make
meth out of tamper resistant meth. That’s why the Food and Drug
Administration approved it for sale as “tamper resistant.”
With the pharmaceutical industry hot on their trail,
Lawrence and Barrett are running scared. Why not, instead, stop running,
stand tall with Hoppy Kercheval, law enforcement personnel, and your
constituents and just say no to the pharmaceutical industry?
No comments:
Post a Comment